REBUTTAL: No Vox, White Men are NOT a Bigger Threat than Islamic Terrorists...
If someone with a psych degree can add a new term to the list of disorders, I'd be much obliged. Let's call it "Virtual Empathy Overload Syndrome" and define it as "Someone who can't read another hot take and/or virtue signaling attempt, be it in the form of a solidarity avatar, hashtag, or asinine essay from mush-minded twits desperate for strangers to know Just How Much They Care(TM)." Because I'm suffering from it and need some kind of pill. Or a special bathroom. That's how it works, right? Bake me a cake or I'll sue.
Not helping is Vox's latest take straight from their porcelain throne: blaming a specific gender and race, rather than ideology, for acts of terrorism. Behold a headline and byline so problematic, I used my control + B option. This sh!t is getting serious.
White American men are a bigger domestic terrorist threat than Muslim foreigners
Since Trump took office, more Americans have been killed by white American men with no connection to Islam than by Muslim terrorists or foreigners.
Both the headline and subhead need an enema. Lemme snap on some sterile gloves and get to it.
Firstly, and this is the thru line throughout the entire post "White American men" is singling out people by their race, gender, and country of origin. Which up until Friday, was a strict no-no in the How to Be a Woke Leftist guide book. Which Lena Dunham passed out with glow-in-the-dark condoms. Compare that to "Muslim foreigners" who can be defined as either gender (yes, there are only two, grab a paper bag and take deep breaths) adhering to a certain set of religious and political tenets. Such as believing women are second class citizens. And no harm should come to "innocents" where "innocents" are defined as anyone who adheres to Islam. Worshipers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster need not apply.
Notice Vox writes "Since Trump took office" to start their little jaunt down blaming a race and gender for being the biggest baddies this side of September 11, 2001. One might also say "Since Trump took office, more Americans have been killed by hurricanes than rampaging snowmen!" or "Since Trump took office, more Americans were injured by Fourth of July fireworks than pricking themselves with Christmas tree pine needles!" Because "since Trump took office" was January. That's *holds up fingers to count* nine months ago. Unless we're measuring a baby which hasn't been sucked out of a womb, it's a rather short time span. Mazel tov.
Because, as already hinted in a paragraph up yonder, "since Trump took office" excludes September 11, 2001. But let's get to the actual article itself:
Radical Islamic terrorists inspired or directed by groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda do pose a clear threat to the US. There is no question about that. Before last night’s deadly shooting in Las Vegas, the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history occurred in June 2016 when an ISIS-inspired man opened fire in a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, killing 49 people and wounding 53.
Hey, thanks for shots at credibility. Inserting some lies after admitting to truth is key to selling gold-plated ca-ca.
And ISIS-linked militants have killed or injured dozens of people in countries like England, France, and Canada so far this year, including two women killed in a stabbing attack in Marseille, France, and several people injured in a car-ramming attack in Edmonton, Canada, just this weekend.
Right again, Vox! But those happened in Europe, all they way across the Atlantic, or for Canada, all they way across the northern border where they say "About" funny.
But here at home, the bigger threat has come from a very different kind of attacker, one with no ties to religion generally or Islamist extremism specifically.
Drumroll: WHITE MEN, OMG.
Vox then lists all the white male baddies they can think of from 2017, tying each one to whiteness, (then shifting to "right-wing extremism" as stealthily as Michael Moore performing Swan Lake). Including Steve Scalise's shooter, who turned out to be a socialist Bernie Bro, but Vox makes no mention of that. I invite you to click the link at your discretion. Vox has also included the Las Vegas shooter who killed 59 people for a motive we do not yet know. So...
But here's another kicker: If you click the hot link in this claim:
In fact, between 2001 and 2015, more Americans were killed by homegrown right-wing extremists than by Islamist terrorists, according to a study by New America, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington, DC.
It doesn’t link to the original source, but rather to a New York Times article that cites the New America source.
The 2015 New York Times has a screenshot of the study, but if you actually go to the original source (New America), it’s been updated since 2015. Guess what? The current tally doesn’t support the Vox claim: 95 Jihadist vs. 68 Far Right Wing. Oops.
But don't discount Vox's exclusion of September 11, 2001. If they'd included that, we'd get 3,000+ for Islam vs. 68 "right-wing extremists." And, again, Steve Scalise's shooter? Left wing. Las Vegas shooter? As of the writing of this post, motive unknown. The White American men are Satan's groupies count is dwindling. Much like Vox's eroding credibility.
Vox's again assuming that all right wing = white. But no. The New America study specifically mentions some of the Islamic terrorists were white converts. Here's what that means for Vox's precious little narrative they pushed without thinking all the way through:
Sorry, but I had to go there.
Look, we could be here all day. So let's get to the worst part: every time there is an Islamic terrorist attack, the left pushes themselves out of the way to say "BUT NOT ALL MUSLIMS!" the fastest. Yet here, Vox headlined their article "White American men" pose a greater threat than "Muslim foreigners."
Did Vox bother to run a calculation on the percentage of white men committing "right wing extremism" compared to the "white male" population of America at large? Then further polling those white men by asking "How many of you support mass shootings?" Asking for a friend. Because we have this: New Poll: Majority of American Muslims Want Sharia. Shocking Numbers On Jihad and Hundreds of UK Muslims Protest the West, Vow to Conquer America. Media Silent.
So which is it? Is guilt by association only wrong when Vox says it is, or do we have to dissect headlines and subheads every time a liberal pecks at keys? And shouldn't we judge people more by their moral codes and beliefs and less by their race and gender?
Written by Courtney Kirchoff